Well, I just had to say something about the video of Saddam Hussein's execution. But I'll try to be brief and focus on only two things: the censorship applied to the official video and the US comments. First, the big row shouldn't be about Saddam at all. Whatever he did, why he did it and how harsh a punishment he deserves is an internal Iraqi affair, and their... democratic history... leaves to be desired. It's not like they know how to behave in a dignified manner, anyway. No, the problem is the censorship on the official video. Somehow, they realised that how they did the whole thing was wrong. They got it! It was wrong. But, in their typical governmental greed, they removed the sound, clipped the video, and spun the story as they could to actually make them look good. The second issue, the US government made a statement that said they would have done everything in a different way and that it all boils down to the inexperience of the Iraqi government. But they were referring to the leaked video! So what they actually said, publicly, is that they had more experience in limiting media access and manipulating public opinion. Which, of course, they do, but that's besides the point. Both these situations show only one thing: shamelessness, the lack of shame, on the part of any government. It's beyond 'power corrupts', it's all about the corrupted seeking power and getting it, wrapped in a nice 'democratic' package.

There is no statistic that I know of that calculates the percentage of "media leaks" in situations like this or Abu Ghraib, etc. In other words, a formula that could estimate the actual number of cases based on the number that were recorded on tape and made it to the public. But my guess is it's similar to fossiles. Only a small fraction of dead animals fossilise in order for archeologists to find them. Such leaks show a trend, rather than exceptions. They also help "them" to become more "experienced".